By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Soundwave on 25 August 2014
Edit Thread
Jumpin said:
Soundwave said:

You need to go back and study what NOA was like in the 90s. They certainly had (sometimes very broad) power to greenlight game projects on their own. 

Most of Arakawa/Lincoln's work in the 90s was quickly undone after Mr. Iwata became president (offically in May 2002, though really he was already operating in that position for some time before that, Yamauchi basically effectively retired from day to day operations in 2000). I attribute much of this to Iwata, but also probably to the general Nintendo seniority (Miyamoto and others at the top are probably responsible for a dramatic shift in Nintendo's strategy to move away from Western devs). 

Iwata and the Nintendo today is biased IMO. If Hideki Kamiya was Henry Kelly, a developer in California or something, IMO Nintendo wouldn't give him the time of day in financing any type of title.

We know studios like Factor 5 and Silicon Knights wanted to continue their relationship with Nintendo. So did Rare. Nintendo is the one that ended those relationships. We also know they haven't been very proactive in replacing much of this lost production either. 

The issue I take is that you are assigning blame to Iwata when he had absolutely nothing to do with any of that. It was Yamauchi who began dismantling relationships and investments with Western studios in the mid-late 1990's. Yamauchi's specific reason for cutting off the partnership with DMA/Rockstar North, was specifically because they were not developing games that would appeal to the Japanese market. It was Yamauchi who turned down the Stamper brothers to purchase Rare, whether or not Rare wanted to continue. It was LucasArts decision for Factor 5 to develop for other Platforms because they felt the GameCube was a weakly performing Platform, and they bet against the Wii. Similarly, Dennis Dyac broke off the relationship between Nintendo and Silicon Knights because he bet against the Wii. Iwata was the one who arranged for Silicon Knights to develop a Metal Gear Solid game on GameCube.

No, Nintendo still had very strong Western relationships up until the early 2000s. NOA probably had its peak autonomy in 2001 or so when they were allowed to market and sell things like Perfect Dark, Starcraft 64, and Conker's Bad Fur Day. 

It takes a nose dive after Iwata takes over as president, and as president the buck stops with him. None of that would've happened if he didn't want it to happen. 

Also Iwata pushing for Silicon Knights to make a Metal Gear remake instead of bringing something new to the table just perfectly illustrates what Nintendo thinks of Western studio development -- they're basically just cattle to work on Japanese IP that the Japanese teams are too busy to do themselves. Eternal Darkness was greenlit under Lincoln/Arakawa, but it never would have been under Iwata. 

It's the same philosphy they basically employ today ... Retro, Next Level Games, Monster Games are basically the only three studios in the West they will work with, and they're only allowed to work on Nintendo IP that Nintendo themselves is too busy to work on over in Japan. And only one game at a time. 

Note too when I say Iwata, I am referring to the general "Iwata-era" which also includes people like Miyamoto and Takeda taking on higher roles on Nintendo's board of directors.